To Seem, Rather Than To Be? (Trans Ideology)

[Kylie]

See I think it’s too reductionist that if I think gender/sex is binary then our genitals are the only thing that define us. Most of us know that we have hormones too. I understand next to nothing about what chromosomes are, but I know it is a primary trait distinguishes between male and female.

Ah, so you think that chromosomes are the best way to determine if someone is male or female?

Okay then. I'd like to share with you a Twitter thread...

This is from a user named @ScienceVet2. You can find the entire thread HERE if you'd like to read it and all the replies that were given.

So. Hi new people! Apparently, we're gonna talk about sex. Like physical sex! Because... there's some confusion.

First, sex defined: We're talking physical sex here, not gender. Body parts, hormones, and genetics (and more).

BLUF: BIOLOGICAL sex is a spectrum

1

Ok, everyone's super familiar with the XX/XY dichotomy, right? Yeah, what we all learned in like... 4th grade? And that's great, it gives you a starting point. But it's... well it's only the very starting point.

The IDEA is, XX is girl, XY is boy, right?

2

Welllll... that's not totally right. There are XY people, who have ovaries! And give birth! AH! And XX people who have male bodies and functional sperm! Double AH!

3

These are usually written off as "abnormalities" and indeed, some cases have medical issues. But many don't (like the XY woman giving birth). And this is really only the very very tip of the iceberg of "wait, that doesn't fit into our M or F box unless we make it bigger"

4

There's a WHOLE HOST of things that can cause all sorts of "weird" things to happen, ranging from genetic (XXY, XYY, Y, X, XX with translocation, XY with deletion) to hormonal (Androgen Insensitivity, Estradiol failure), and disruptors like dioxins

5

So, you're a scientist, and you want to research stuff, right? Which means you have to categorize stuff. Without categories, data is hard! So you take allll these people, including the "weird" ones and you plot them on a graph. Logical!

6

You use all the differences there are, different genetics, different responses to hormones, different effectiveness in signalling pathways, different sizes in Aanteroventral periventricular nucleus (AVPV) (yeah that's a thing) and give everything numbers, add them up.

7

You get what's called a bimodal distribution (mostly, we'll get to that later) Which looks like this. Those two big peaks are what we call "male" and "female" (even conveniently colored pink for boys and blue for girls - we are using victorian gender colors right?)

8

Now, when you're trying to look at data, we often group stuff. When we do that with a plot like this, it's called a "histogram." Basically we're breaking down a curved line into discrete "bins." Like this (image stolen from the web).

9

Traditionally, we've used REALLY BIG bins for this when talking about sex. Basically you either group everything vaguely near a peak into the peak, or you just pretend there's nothing else but the biggest peaks. This makes it super easy, because 2 is simple to do data with.

10

However, as we've gotten to know more and more about signaling and brains and hormones and started to pay more attention to the outliers where standard stuff just didn't seem to work, we discovered that this isn't a great model to use.

11

Now I'm not talking feelings here. I'm talking about data. As you start to look at anything interesting, like say the effects of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-dioxin on animals, you start to realize that a 2 bin model doesn't predict your results well.

12

At first you say, "Well it was just weird." So you redo it, and it still doesn't work. So you look at your model and you say, "Well ok, what if the model's wrong?"

But the model sort of... almost predicts a lot of things, and it worked for years, so...

13

Some enterprising soul says, "Hey, remember that histogram where we said we'll just model using the peaks?" And everyone goes, "Uh, yeah?" And they say, "What if we... USED that data?" And everyone groans, because complicated data is hard.

14

But someone sits down and does the work, and lo, wow the model starts to work again. Where TCDD was "randomly" turning some boys into girls but then some girls into boys, now you can see there's a subgroup of what you'd called "female" that responds like the "male"

15

What's important here is that you haven't MISLABELED males as females. These are functional "females" who can do all the usual "female" things like gestate babies. But they respond to this one endocrine disruptor in a "male" way.

16

So you add another two categories, call them "Male2" and "Female2" and go on, happy that your model works! You've got 4 sexes now, but you don't really have to tell anyone that, right?

17

Exceeeept then you remember you've got those XY people that gestate babies. So you add "Intersex1" And then the XX people with penes... and ovaries? Ok, "Intersex2" because all these groups respond differently with signalling and brains when you get into the weeds

18

And the more you look, the more we LEARN, the more we're able to separate out those fine differences. Depending on what we're doing, we may not care. If a doc is giving you aspirin, it probably isn't a big deal.

19

But if they're using a steroid on you? Or treating dioxin poisoning? THAT [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] COULD BE IMPORTANT. It's like saying, "the light's off so the power must not be flowing." It really matters if the light's off because the bulb blew.

20

If we go back to that histogram plot, we can keep breaking down your biological sex into smaller and smaller differences in brain areas, hormone levels, signalling differences, genetic variances. There's nothing stopping us from binning EVERY INDIVIDUAL into their own bin.

21

Technically, this wouldn't be "infinite sexes" but 7.4 billion sexes is functionally close for our brains. Now, our medicine isn't advanced enough for THAT level of detail to make any difference. BUT IT MIGHT BE in the future. Individualized medicine!

22

The thing to remember is that this isn't "new." We're not 'inventing sexes' here. Sex has ALWAYS been this curve. We were just using REALLY BIG bins. And now we're realizing that that's not representative of biology, it's inhibiting understanding of medicine and biology

23

In case anyone's curious, this isn't ideology. This is because I had to figure out why my data didn't match the prediction. Those rats I mentioned? Yeah, my lab. And lab rats are a really pure genetic monoculture, and they STILL don't fit the two peak model well.

24

So, since it's come up, an addendum!

Yes, we looked at other things we could do to make our data fit the existing model, that's how science works! The ONLY way the data fit was if we let "sex" be more than just those two narrow peaks.

25

Models purpose in science is to predict. If they don't predict correctly, first we check if we've measured the data correctly, and repeat the experiment a couple more times. If it still doesn't fit, we have to look at the model.

26

Intersex! Because I didn't specifically mention this above.

"Intersex" is a term used to collectively speak of the "middle ground" of biology where people can't easily be binned into those two big "male" and "female" peaks. It can include a large range of biology

27

It is worth noting that I never talk about transgender in this thread. Intersex is not the same as transgender. You can be one without the other, or be both.

28

For people who think this is just "outliers"

Current estimates are that the intersex population is at least 2%. We know that's low because there are a lot of "invisibly intersex" people. That means AT LEAST 150 million people in the world.

29

I apologize for the failure to use the word "intersex" higher up in the discussion. Many people in the middle ground (including the XY person who can carry a child, for example) use this term. I cannot go back and edit the thread, and apologize for my overly clinical description.

Part of the purpose of the thread, which may have failed, was to point out that "intersex" is not a condition, it is not a disease. It's natural with a bimodal distribution. Science not only supports this, it suggests that ignoring intersex people makes your conclusions wrong​

So, as you can see, using chromosomes to figure out someone's biological sex just doesn't work all that well.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I copied this from Answer In Genesis:

AiG's 0-for-lifetime record for accuracy in matters of biology, evolution, and the origin of life is such a matter of common knowledge that their very mention over in the Creation/Evolution sub forum instantly gets the quoter dismissed as either a liar or a sucker.

I'm not disappointed to see them branch out into other sciences to get wrong -- disappointment would imply higher expectations.

 

[muichimotsu]

My trans friend says the same, and I told him the only difference between us is that my parts are factory original, and he's saving his money for an upgrade.

Honestly he joked for years that he had a penis anyway, referring to a particular private female anatomy area. I was supportive overall (initially he confided with close friends they considered themselves nonbinary, but it was likely just a consideration at the time), though I'll admit I still stumble in terms of the pronoun and feel like I can't just call out my parents that misgender him (not maliciously, pretty sure they're accepting enough).

 

[muichimotsu]

Certainly...



I'm going to assume that here you're referring to your biological sex -- you are a man because of certain dangly bits you habe in your shorts. Fair enough.

You were born one. You will die one. Indeed it is simple. Now comes the more complicated question: What will you do during during all the time in between?

• What does society expect you to do -- and not do -- because you're a man?
• What roles (in the family, the community, the workspace, the country, etc.) are you expected to fulfill? Which ones are off-limits -- because you're a man?
• How are you supposed to behave? What kind of emotions are you allowed to express in public? What kind of normally frowned-on behaviors can you get away with? What behaviors are completely unacceptable -- because you're a man?

All these questions have certain answers which are subtly enforced by our culture. Let me give you two examples from Hollywood:

In 1983, Michael Keaton starred in a comedy called Mr. Mom. The plot was simple enough: he's an auto engineer who gets laid off, so when his wife manages to find work before he does, he agrees to stay home and watch the children while she works....hijinks ensue because while he means well and does his best, as a "man," he's clueless as a homemaker.

View attachment 315971

Question: Want to guess how the movie ends?

Second example: in the Police Academy movies, the late ex-NFL star Bubba Smith played Cadet/Officer Hightower. His imposing presence and physical strength was the source of most of the humor around his character:

View attachment 315972

The joke? During the first movie, Hightower mentions that before joining the police force, he was a florist. There's even a scene when he (briefly) quits the force and goes back to his old job:

View attachment 315973

Question: the scene is played for laughs, but why is it funny?

See what I mean about "gender" being (at least partially) a social construct?

Haven't seen either, though I'm familiar with Mr. Mom slightly. But a character in a fairly recent John Cena comedy, Playing With Fire, is kind of like that in a way.

Imposing scary guy, head taller than most characters, masculine beard and has an axe (because firefighter movie) and yet sings the MLP FIM song to a young girl at her birthday party, suggesting he's very familiar with the show. Yet no one questioned him being a man afterwards, I'd bet.

 

[muichimotsu]

Forcing someone to accept an ideology they think is morally wrong is flat out wrong.

That goes for the LGBT+ crowd forcing traditional orthodox Christians accept their ideology and lifestyle. I can respect a person without approving of every action they do. Sometimes, the left just does not understand this. It's a two way street.

No one's forcing you to accept it as moral in terms of your personal religious worldview, but to not force your preferential standards in regards to law as a whole, because that is not meant to protect your religious preferences and prejudices, but your right to practice religion insofar as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others of your own religion, of other religions and of no religion

Respect is earned, which includes the idea that in a free market of ideas, you don't have to be forced to accept something that you express views of disapproval about. But it also means people can and should criticize those views as antiquated when they're based on little more than faith and revulsion at the other, a prejudice that is ironic given Christianity's tendency of embracing otherness and standing out from the crowd as a chosen one of God and all

 

[muichimotsu]

How is gender a social construct? It's a sincere question. Elaborate a bit more if you choose.

I am a man. I was born one. Will die one. simple

Not sure you seem to understand a social construct to begin with, so expecting someone to explain it to you is intellectually lazy if you haven't even made an effort to understand the sociological concept in the first place

Do you also think how society ought to regard what men and women do is purely related to their physical traits or is that outdated rubbish half the time (like the idea that women should never have jobs or that men cannot be emotionally vulnerable or do "feminine" things like fashion design, etc)?

Socially constructed does not mean absolutely relative, you're making a leap if that's even close to your assessment of gender as being understood in a way that isn't essentialist or physical in nature (since gender did not traditionally refer to physical traits, it was language based for feminine/masculine words, like in Latin and other Romance languages or general concepts of femininity and masculinity without regard to genitals, gender only a thing that appears to have been conflated with sex by Victorian era prudes)

 

[TLK Valentine]

I was supportive overall (initially he confided with close friends they considered themselves nonbinary, but it was likely just a consideration at the time), though I'll admit I still stumble in terms of the pronoun

I haven't had that problem with my friend, but I'll admit it was awkward seeing him for the first time after he started his transition (we only see each other occasionally; he lives on the other side of the state).

You see, a few years before he transitioned, there was this New Year's Eve party, we had a couple of drinks, the clock struck midnight, and... well...

We joke about it now: "Well, Jim, you weren't kidding when you said 'it's not you, it's me'!"

and feel like I can't just call out my parents that misgender him (not maliciously, pretty sure they're accepting enough).

Honest mistakes; they happen.

 

[muichimotsu]

I never said they were "aberrant," "mentally ill," and I am not being challenged. I simply do not and cannot understand. I mean no disrespect to any trans person.

The response to not understanding is not to take a dismissive notion that insinuates something that, even with the "best intentions", does not preclude a prejudiced attitude in regards to LGBTQ as a whole, let alone trans people specifically

Oh, you're not being challenged? So you think you already know everything regarding this that you need? Or do you want to reconsider that position and acknowledge ignorance on a subject?

If you just want to leave the conversation, there's no need to announce it, because I don't think people care that much that someone who prefers their comfortable worldview doesn't want to engage critically on something pertinent in societal discussions

 

[muichimotsu]

I haven't had that problem with my friend, but I'll admit it was awkward seeing him for the first time after he started his transition (we only see each other occasionally; he lives on the other side of the state).

You see, a few years before he transitioned, there was this New Year's Eve party, we had a couple of drinks, the clock struck midnight, and... well...

We joke about it now: "Well, Jim, you weren't kidding when you said 'it's not you, it's me'!"




Honest mistakes; they happen.

Considering he started transitioning in 2020, yeah, I only got to see them around July 2021 for a bit and then a month ago for a convention.

Considering I knew this person as a woman for most of my life, yeah, it's going to be tough for anyone in that situation a bit

 

[TLK Valentine]

Haven't seen either, though I'm familiar with Mr. Mom slightly. But a character in a fairly recent John Cena comedy, Playing With Fire, is kind of like that in a way.

Imposing scary guy, head taller than most characters, masculine beard and has an axe (because firefighter movie) and yet sings the MLP FIM song to a young girl at her birthday party, suggesting he's very familiar with the show. Yet no one questioned him being a man afterwards, I'd bet.

Put a "man's man" in a "woman's" role -- instant comedy. But most people don't ask why...

 

[didactics]

This is not helpful. I want to have a discussion about biology. Reminisce all you want about subjective feelings, it's not helpful. Explain to me how there are--what you call--six different sexes. Intersex anomalies are errors in the genetic code, but there is no fundamental error in the sex. Weren't some of you wrongfully accusing me of reducing the sexes to only what their genitals are? Something like Swyers syndrome can be explained as a woman who is indeed a woman, that has a genetic mistake of (XY) but is infertile as a result. So it's a syndrome, not a 3rd sex.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Forcing someone to accept an ideology they think is morally wrong is flat out wrong.

That goes for the LGBT+ crowd forcing traditional orthodox Christians accept their ideology and lifestyle. I can respect a person without approving of every action they do. Sometimes, the left just does not understand this. It's a two way street.

Speaking of two way streets, how does this apply to the people who want a nationwide ban of abortion, or to reverse the Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex marriage?

 

[TLK Valentine]

This is not helpful. I want to have a discussion about biology.

If you want to talk about gender, you're going to have to discuss more than biology.

If you're not willing to do that, you're not ready for this discussion.

 

[muichimotsu]

Put a "man's man" in a "woman's" role -- instant comedy. But most people don't ask why...

The inverse also is used, but yeah, does strike one as pretty imbalanced when the joke is far more, "Man dresses as woman," versus what is probably far less common inversely, like Amanda Bynes in "She's the Man,"

 

[didactics]

If you want to talk about gender, you're going to have to discuss more than biology.

If you're not willing to do that, you're not ready for this discussion.

Not if gender is sex. Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary defines gender as “the sex of an individual (i.e., male or female)” and sex as “1. the characteristics that differentiate male and females in most plants and animals. 2. Gender.”5 It’s clear from a medical and scientific perspective that they are the same. Only those who desire to do what is right in their own eyes (Judges 21:25) want to make these terms distinctive in order to justify their sin.

 

[muichimotsu]

Not if gender is sex. Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary defines gender as “the sex of an individual (i.e., male or female)” and sex as “1. the characteristics that differentiate male and females in most plants and animals. 2. Gender.”5 It’s clear from a medical and scientific perspective that they are the same. Only those who desire to do what is right in their own eyes (Judges 21:25) want to make these terms distinctive in order to justify their sin.

Wow, you just cite one source and think that's all you need?

I'm with @TLK Valentine, you really need to eat a slice of humble pie and consider that you're WAY out of your depth in knowledge, let alone even just experience in regards to argumentation, because this is just digging a deeper hole and doubling down on this insistence that your position is right without substantiating it, merely asserting it by authority (and using God as some addition, as if that's going to motivate people necessarily)

Also, important consideration: definitions describe usage, not essential meaning, they're not set in stone and you can find definitions for a term conflicting based on perspective, history, culture, etc. It doesn't mean it's all relative, and it also doesn't mean one definition is absolutely superior and can never change, it's a middle ground to draw

 

[didactics]

Wow, you just cite one source and think that's all you need?

I'm with @TLK Valentine, you really need to eat a slice of humble pie and consider that you're WAY out of your depth in knowledge, let alone even just experience in regards to argumentation, because this is just digging a deeper hole and doubling down on this insistence that your position is right without substantiating it, merely asserting it by authority (and using God as some addition, as if that's going to motivate people necessarily)

Also, important consideration: definitions describe usage, not essential meaning, they're not set in stone and you can find definitions for a term conflicting based on perspective, history, culture, etc. It doesn't mean it's all relative, and it also doesn't mean one definition is absolutely superior and can never change, it's a middle ground to draw

Alright, well why don’t you explain it to me then: how do you know there are six sexes?

 

[didactics]

You want to convince me of gender theory, right? You’re going to have to talk a lot more biology.

 

[Kylie]

Alright, well why don’t you explain it to me then: how do you know there are six sexes?

This website explains it.

The 6 Most Common Biological Sexes in Humans

 

[TLK Valentine]

The inverse also is used, but yeah, does strike one as pretty imbalanced when the joke is far more, "Man dresses as woman," versus what is probably far less common inversely, like Amanda Bynes in "She's the Man,"

Someone (I think it was Kant, but don't quote me on that), said that the reason for humor is to laugh at "absurdities."

Since males are considered the "norm" in society, men who either choose or are forced to not act like "men" seem absurd, therefore funny.